W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: wordsmith?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 19:35:27 -0500 (EST)
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
cc: love26@gorge.net, "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9903051934420.8715-100000@tux.w3.org>
I like the proposed wording. The rest of it I would put in a technique,
cross referenced to the alt text registry.


On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Kynn Bartlett wrote:

  Agreed.  I have a real problem with that whole thing anyway.
  How about:
  Only include automatically generated alternative content when
  the meaning or function of the described object is known with
  or maybe:
  "...has been identified by the author."
  This allows for the author, for example, to select from a set of
  "bullet points" that include ALT="*" without having to endure
  a prompt for each one, as well as the author being able to check
  a box that says:
  [X] Always use this textual description for this particular image.
  At 04:07 p.m. 03/05/99 -0800, William Loughborough wrote:
  >2.3.5 Do not generate description text or insert place-holder text
  >except human-authored description text when the meaning or function of
  >the described object is known with certainty. 
  >This could be taken wrongly, i.e. "do not generate...text...when the
  >meaning...is known".  I don't think that's what we mean.
  Kynn Bartlett <kynn@hwg.org>
  President, Governing Board Member
  HTML Writers Guild <URL:http://www.hwg.org>

--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://purl.oclc.org/net/charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Friday, 5 March 1999 19:35:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:42 UTC